🇮🇷 The Iran Thread II

[Hobgoblin]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't we allies with Iran until the 1979 Islamic Revolution when hostages were taken? Since that point, its been tit for tat between us. We support Iraq in the Iran-Iraq War, they become a state sponsor of terrorism. They attack synagogues around the world, we lump them with the Axis of Evil. They say Israel needs to be wiped off the map, we say no options are off the table to end their nuke program. We slap sanctions on them, they threaten to close the Straights.

My point is, neither side is innocent. But all I keep hearing is "This is Iraq all over again," and "This is all propaganda!" and "Iran has no desire to attack other countries!" I was no fan of the Iraq War at all and I dont like the idea of an Iran War but for crying out loud, Iran is not a poor misunderstood victim. You're fooling your self if you believe that.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I did some digging and found this video. I'm willing to take a second look at my stance.

 

[WildcatNC]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't we allies with Iran until the 1979 Islamic Revolution when hostages were taken? Since that point, its been tit for tat between us. We support Iraq in the Iran-Iraq War, they become a state sponsor of terrorism. They attack synagogues around the world, we lump them with the Axis of Evil. They say Israel needs to be wiped off the map, we say no options are off the table to end their nuke program. We slap sanctions on them, they threaten to close the Straights.

My point is, neither side is innocent. But all I keep hearing is "This is Iraq all over again," and "This is all propaganda!" and "Iran has no desire to attack other countries!" I was no fan of the Iraq War at all and I dont like the idea of an Iran War but for crying out loud, Iran is not a poor misunderstood victim. You're fooling your self if you believe that.

Oh i'm not saying that at all. It is a bad regime no doubt. I'm more countering this notion that we are innocent and just being the hero. We constantly throw gasoline on a fire and cry when we get burned. I'm saying we need to mind our own damn business and let the other superpowers take care of rogue states in their hemisphere and on their borders. We have been meddling over there, from propping up regimes, arming rebels, training and arming terrorists, economic warfare, etc. Then we cry foul when there is blowback and claim we are "defending ourselves" or "spreading democracy" and invade them. Should we just go invade every country we think isn't nice enough? When you set a precedent of policing the world, where do you draw the line?

If we want others to respect our sovereignty then we must respect theirs. Its not ok for other countries to meddle in our hemisphere but we certainly can in theirs?

Its all hypocritical criminal nonsense imo. Its empire building disguised as "spreading democracy" (which we don't even practice). Our foreign policy operates much like organized crime.

 

[WildcatNC]

I did some digging and found this video. I'm willing to take a second look at my stance.

Good find. That's what I was referring to in the sense that they can (and want to) take care of themselves. We aren't eager to give up our power and influence over them though.

I think we publicly are being captain save-a-hoe for Israel, but I think the ones we are really in bed with are the Saudi's. We are so intertwined financially at the top levels that we would attack anyone they really wanted us to.

Keep looking into it. I think you will find out what I have. None of us know it all and i'm still learning as well.

The important thing is to not be an ideologue and seek out the truth.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Fair enough. I think we have a better understanding of each other now. *salutes*

 

[Hobgoblin]

Here is another question I'm going to throw out to everyone:

Let's say Iran does develop a bomb and manages to destroy Israel. What, if anything, should the U.S. do?

 

[WildcatNC]

Here is another question I'm going to throw out to everyone:

Let's say Iran does develop a bomb and manages to destroy Israel. What, if anything, should the U.S. do?

In the hypothetical that Iran were to somehow accomplish that, they would also be wiped from the map. Israel has some of the best equipment we can provide, including nukes (though i'm not sure if they "officially" admit to having them, i'll have to check).

It would be mutual annihilation IMO, we wouldn't have to do anything. It probably WOULD set off whole other s***storms over there though.

 

[NY1981]

Even if it hasn't been official or confirmed, Israel has nukes. Would be mutual assured destruction if something like that ever happened and a lot of fallout both literally and figuratively. Israel has had their finger on the trigger towards Iran for quite some time now and wouldn't hesitate to wipe them out as well.

 

[WildcatNC]

Even if it hasn't been official or confirmed, Israel has nukes. Would be mutual assured destruction if something like that ever happened and a lot of fallout both literally and figuratively. Israel has had their finger on the trigger towards Iran for quite some time now and wouldn't hesitate to wipe them out as well.

Agreed.

I looked into it real quick and Israel definitely has nukes. They CANT admit it or we would have to stop giving them aid due to Nuclear Anti-proliferation treaties.

Israel is much more of a danger to Iran than vice versa IMO. Iran would get the worse end of any war against Israel, as would ANY other middle eastern nation. We have armed and trained them well over the years. They are geared for defense mostly though, not offense. Israel couldn't take punishment as well as Iran though and would have to rely on the Arrow missile defense system to protect them. Iran could withstand a few nukes even. Israel has much less surface to cover with missiles.

 

[8wid]

Message Behind 'Bomb Iran' Billboard

 

[WildcatNC]

Message Behind 'Bomb Iran' Billboard

That guys on top of things. Glad to see it.

 

[DBryan]

Here is another question I'm going to throw out to everyone:

Let's say Iran does develop a bomb and manages to destroy Israel. What, if anything, should the U.S. do?

Depends.

If its in response from an attack from Israel? Then USA should do nothing.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Depends.

If its in response from an attack from Israel? Then USA should do nothing.

And if Iran attacks first?

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

They're not going to nuke each other.

 

[Hobgoblin]

They're not going to nuke each other.

That's why this is a hypothetical.

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

My bad, I'll play along lol.

"Let's say Iran does develop a bomb and manages to destroy Israel. What, if anything, should the U.S. do?"

Gather their allies in the region, topple the government of Iran, destroy their entire army and navy. It's highly doubtful nuking Iran in retaliation would make the situation any better, or end any war.

 

[DACrowe]

I do not want an Iran War. It would cost far too much in human life as well as treasure we don't have and the results will be negligible....you can't force them to not build a nuke without a decade-long regime change.

The only reason I'm posting here is too many seem to think the Iranian government is fine and dandy. The same government that guns down its own citizens who protest fraudulent elections, calls Israel a cancer soon to be removed, supplied Hezbollah in their 2006 war with Israel and has helped kill hundreds of Americans in Iraq. They are not an innocent victim attacked by the much "dreaded" MSM.

Also, a little nugget to chew on: Let's say Iran gets nuclear weapons and doesn't decide to attack Israel....for now, just as many of their proponents say. But still in this region of the world, Iran is nuclear and most of the Middle East is not. Suddenly, Saudi Arabia, the "secular" and western-friendly counter to the more ideological and indoctronaire Iranian regime wants nuclear weapons. They start trying to build and hey, since they helped the ever so stable and trustworthy Pakistan with their nuclear program, perhaps Pakistan will return the favor and ship some weapons Saudi's way. Now other regional powers see the Saudis, Iranians, Pakistanis and Israelis all have nuclear weapons. Well, Egypt and Turkey aren't going to be outdone in their continued regional pissing contest, so they start building.

You think the Middle East is a headache now? Imagine a nuclear Middle East in a perpetual state of Cold War? But it's okay, because countries like Egypt have always been the model of stability. I'm not endorsing war with Iran. I'm just saying those who dismiss the idea of an Iran with nuclear weapons as moot to consider the larger picture.

 

[Thundercrack85]

The best we can hope for is that Iran gives up its nuclear program voluntarily like Gaddafi's Libya. But that seems increasingly less likely.

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

I do not want an Iran War. It would cost far too much in human life as well as treasure we don't have and the results will be negligible....you can't force them to not build a nuke without a decade-long regime change.

The only reason I'm posting here is too many seem to think the Iranian government is fine and dandy. The same government that guns down its own citizens who protest fraudulent elections, calls Israel a cancer soon to be removed, supplied Hezbollah in their 2006 war with Israel and has helped kill hundreds of Americans in Iraq. They are not an innocent victim attacked by the much "dreaded" MSM.

Also, a little nugget to chew on: Let's say Iran gets nuclear weapons and doesn't decide to attack Israel....for now, just as many of their proponents say. But still in this region of the world, Iran is nuclear and most of the Middle East is not. Suddenly, Saudi Arabia, the "secular" and western-friendly counter to the more ideological and indoctronaire Iranian regime wants nuclear weapons. They start trying to build and hey, since they helped the ever so stable and trustworthy Pakistan with their nuclear program, perhaps Pakistan will return the favor and ship some weapons Saudi's way. Now other regional powers see the Saudis, Iranians, Pakistanis and Israelis all have nuclear weapons. Well, Egypt and Turkey aren't going to be outdone in their continued regional pissing contest, so they start building.

You think the Middle East is a headache now? Imagine a nuclear Middle East in a perpetual state of Cold War? But it's okay, because countries like Egypt have always been the model of stability. I'm not endorsing war with Iran. I'm just saying those who dismiss the idea of an Iran with nuclear weapons as moot to consider the larger picture.

Agreed. Although, I still don't think anybody would use them. They are the best regime change deterrents and I can see how developing nations would want them. Pakistan and India are a good example of mortal enemies that have killed a total of a million people between them and have yet to use even one nuclear weapon.

 

[WildcatNC]

Yep, they want us out of their business.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/27/israel-wont-warn-us-befor_n_1305601.html?1330398253&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D139005

 

[Donut]

The U.S. has no right to police the world & to needlessly risk American Lives. Only get involved if the U.S. is threatened

 

[8wid]

And if Iran attacks first?

If Iran attacks Israel first than it's Israel's problem. Iran firing missiles at US bases in Kuwait or Afghanistan or planning a suicide bombing in the New York Subway on the other hand is a blantant act of war that could be justified by an aerial war that eliminates the regime, no ground troops though. The occupation alone would take at least twenty-five years. An attack by Iran would see that nation as the aggressor in the eyes of the international community though.

 

[DACrowe]

An aerial war would not eliminate the Iranian regime, but probably embolden it by reinforcing its rhetoric of the evil west and Americans who want to destroy an Islamic "republic." I've seen statements from the Pentagon and Panetta that range US aerial assaults could delay Iran's nuclear program anywhere between 2 to 10 years. But the aftermath could cause the regime to be more determined to get one and to no longer comply with the few international regulators they currently do in the quest for nuclear power.

In short, you cannot be blazé about Iran. A war with that country would not be another Bosnia, Kosovo, Libya, etc. where we intervened on the side of rebels or endangered dissidents. No, we'd likely be looking at a full-scale war. The kind that would make Iraq look reasonable. If there was solely an air war, we'd be back with at this point with an even more dangerous Iran in five years.

I don't want it. The US cannot bare the cost of this war, but Iran continues to poke the proverbial international bear for attention. I think Israel has legitimate cause to be concerned, moreso than New York commuters which is hawkish paranoia, and that is where the needle is going to move, if it does. I still hope that Iran will come back to the table as the Oil embargo has made them desperate for cash. That seems like the best, though unlikely, scenario at this point.

 

[Thundercrack85]

If the trade sanctions don't work, there's little anyone can do.

 

[8wid]

I don't want it. The US cannot bare the cost of this war, but Iran continues to poke the proverbial international bear for attention. I think Israel has legitimate cause to be concerned, moreso than New York commuters which is hawkish paranoia, and that is where the needle is going to move, if it does. I still hope that Iran will come back to the table as the Oil embargo has made them desperate for cash. That seems like the best, though unlikely, scenario at this point.

Of course the United States cannot bare the cost of this war, it's almost bankrupt after the fiascos in Iraq and Afghanistan. A large war between, Israel, Iran, and or the United States means SCUDS or cruise missiles being fired at Israel, oil fields in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, Kuwait, Bahrain, and others where the West draws much of its oil from. Iran's oil fields will probably meet the same fate in a last ditch fight. I'd might think they would burn their own oil fields like Iraq did in retreat during the last war. Missiles can be fired on US bases in the area including Afghanistan. This means countless thousands of civilians are killed in the Middle East, and elsewhere where retribution is taken against American, Israeli, and Jewish interests.

Whether the Straits of Hormuz or closed or not its very likely Iran would fire on oil fields in the Middle East and destroy the infrastructure that is already fragile. The global flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf would be cut off and it would take years to rebuilt all of the infrastructure. Because ethanol effects everything from the production of consumer goods to the transporation of food, imagine hyperinflation to happen on a global scale. Fragile economies already in huge debt would collapse and the entire world would be dragged down by it. Imagine another Great Depression from it. The scenario in V for Vendetta is not impossible in the long run either.

Iran War Scenario

Although I think the realistic idea of a war with Iran is unlikely and just rhetoric used by the media to gain ratings and make money. Ever since the United States invaded Iraq, this rhetoric of an attack on Iran has been racheted up, it's gotten old and nothing has really changed since it started. The same hype existed over the war in Iraq initially going nuclear, regarding chemical weapons used against NATO troops, suicide bombings at gathering places for Americans and Israelis around the world, the war extending into Syria where they felt the WMDs might have been moved too, even to Afghanistan where Osama Bin Laden could have some weapons of his own. Alot of fear mongering and paranoia revolves around the issue, I wouldn't fear a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities too much, corporate media only uses it for manipulation.